Reading Rehabilitation Implementing Patient-Focused Care
Reading Rehab Hospital Roots HealthSouth’s RRH Facility
Built in 1925 the historic Stone Manor on a 30acre campus. “The million dollar home”. Was originally the home of Isaac Eberly, a prominent businessman and hosiery mogul.
Leading Change Clint Kreitner: CEO of RRH from 1989-2000 History:
Early career as a Naval officer Respected entrepreneur with 4 successful companies On board of RRH for 3 years
Kreitner’s Forecast
Kreitner: “The hospital had an awesome reputation, a dedicated staff, and no debt.” Instincts: his insight of business told him that RRH was headed for difficult times Reasons:
Over 50% of RRH referels came from one large hospital Industry was inflicting double digit annual increases on the U.S. economy
Action:
He began forums with the staff to communicate need for change Opened the financial books to the staff to show them what he saw
Staff Reaction
This type of communication was a first for RRH and not typical for that industry. It made many of the staff feel uncomfortable because they had been in a thriving industry for 15-20 years and did not want to believe they were in trouble. Needless to say, his opinion was not universally shared due to his lack of healthcare industry experience.
Rehabilitation Services
Brief History of RRH from 1958 to present In 1998 RRH had 76 beds, 116 therapists and 25 million in revenue Most patients came to RRH after treatment of an illness or injury at an acute care hospital Rehab hospitals restore basic functioning, such as walking, climbing stairs, getting dressed, and feeding oneself Used Functional Independence Measures (FIM's) Goal was to help patients leave functioning as independentely as possible
Rehabilitation Services
RRH, like other rehab hospitals, also differed from acute care hospitals in being smaller than most of them. RRH's annual revenues of $25 million compared to more than $200 million for the largest and $45 million for the smallest acute care hospital in its region RRH admitted patients with a wide range of diagnoses
Received care from 5 disciplines
Head injury Stroke Spinal cord injuries Orthopedic problems Physiatrists (rehab dr.) Nurses Social workers Physical therapists Occupational therapists
If patient had head injury or stroke:
Psychologists Cognitive therapists Speech therapists
Effectiveness
Measured effectiveness by using three dimensions:
Average length of stay compared favorably to the national average which was 21 days
Average length of stay Increase of functional outcomes Patient satisfaction
Achieved nearly the same increase in the level of functional independence Patients were more satisfied with quality of care at RRH compared to national benchmark)
Patient care declined over the next 8 years
This was due to shorter lengths of stay rather than due to fewer patients Fewer patient days = Less revenue
Mission
Mission of Reading Rehabilitation As a subsidiary of Adventist Health Ministries, Inc, Reading Rehabilitation Hospital was a non profit organization in Pennsylvania. The well being of the patient is the number one priority of the RRH, together with its sister companies. Because of the center’s affiliation with the Adventist church, commitment to the patient’s well being became stronger. The mission of the Reading Rehabilitation center did not limit itself to the physical healing, but spiritual healing as well.
Purpose
The organization’s values, as well as strategic
and operational decisions were also base on this vision. The mission and vision of Reading Rehabilitation Hospital was put at a test due to the competitive world of health care. As mentioned by Kreitner, the CEO brought in since 1989, finding balance between mission and real world business practice was one of the greatest challenges faced by Reading Rehab.
Pressures from Managed Care
1980’s and 1990’s healthcare costs were escalating out of control
The government responded with changes to Medicare and Medicaid.
In 1983, Medicare introduced a Prospective Payment System (PPS)
with adverse consequences for both the federal budget and U.S. corporations.
under which standard payments were made based on a patient’s diagnosis, regardless of the institution’s actual cost.
Medicaid, funded through state budgets, declined in funding over the 1980’s and 1990’s, reducing the level of reimbursements.
One of the most significant innovations affecting the U.S. healthcare industry was the rapid emergence of “ managed care .”
What is “Managed Care”?
The term “managed care” is used to
describe a variety of techniques intended to reduce the cost of providing health benefits and improve the quality of care. According to the National Library of Medicine, “managed care” encompasses
programs.
Main Purpose: To reduce unnecessary health care costs through a variety of mechanisms such as: Economic incentives for physicians and patients to select less costly forms of care Programs for reviewing the medical necessity of specific services Increased beneficiary cost sharing Controls on inpatient admissions and lengths of stay Selective contracting with health care providers Intensive management of high-cost health care cases
Fee-for-Service (FFS) Until 1980s private health insurance plans allowed patients to choose their own doctors.
Doctors were free to prescribe any treatment consistent with accepted medical practice and to determine fees for such treatment.
Under this fee-for-service (FFS) model, the role of the insurance company was simply to “pay the bills.”
Change…
This all changed in 1980s with new state laws that allowed insurance companies to negotiate prices directly with health care providers. In attempt to reduce costs… Managed care organizations (MCO) adopted a more business-like approach for delivering care.
The idea was to get doctors and hospitals under contract at discounted prices and then control the use of services by managed care health plan members.
What would happen …
Patients would choose from a predetermined list of participating doctors, a primary care physician (PCP) who served as the “gatekeeper” for the
patient.
These changes meant that hospitals had to perform tasks more efficiently so costs did not exceed payments received from MCOs.
Reading Rehabilitation Hospital
Acute Rehabilitation hospitals like RRH were cushioned from some of these changes in the healthcare system…at least for the time being! Most RRH patients were on Medicare, and the more generous the Medicare rate was, the more advantage it was for the Reading Rehabilitation Hospital. Kreitner noted, “”At times, we would keep patients twice as long as we do, and get reimbursed for it.” “But we can’t afford to get lazy. So we strive to keep costs down and maximize incentive pay, rather than maximizing the reimbursement.”
Main Goal… “TO MAXIMIZE INCENTIVE PAY” RRH (Reading Rehabilitation Hospital) was at advantage because they would keep patients longer and they would get reimbursements
Prospective Payment System did not force them to lower their cost because Medicare would pay the difference between average cost and what their limit was
Competition Upstream acute care hospitals
Rehabilitation Hospitals
Downstream Organizations
Reading Rehabilitation Hospital Only acute rehab in Pennsylvania market Accounted for about 6% of market share Shared the market with 3 acute care hospitals
Reading Hospital & Medical Center (RHMC): 57%
St. Joseph’s Medical Center: 24%
Community General Hospital: 13%
Patient Flow Local Acute Care Hospitals
Trauma Centers
Incoming Patients
Physicians (home/nursing homes)
Home Discharged Patients Nursing homes
Continuum of Care Acute care hospitals kept patients longer Create new efficiencies and fill empty beds Traditional nursing homes began offering many rehab services Rehab expansion of other industry participation would have a negative effect on RRH
Market Conditions
RRH = only licensed provider of acute rehab services in Berks County
RHMC tried to buy RRH’s license Clint Kreitner valued it at $6-$8 Million Pennsylvania Regulations required Certification of need (CON) before granting license for new acute rehab service CON limited rehabs services others could provide
Market Conditions
Increasing competition in product market Highly competitive labor market Occupational Therapists Physical Therapists
Unfavorable Supply/Demand
Kreitner: “We constantly live in fear that our therapists will bail out en masse and as a result, the organization will be brought to its knees.”
The Rehabilitation Process Admission from upstream providers Care providers from multiple discipline evaluate patients Weekly conference involving interaction between the patient and care providers Integrated plan care Discharge
The Rehabilitation Process
Process Improvement
Kreitner assumed Leadership Patient care across disciplines ineffective Delay in treatment and inconsistency among treatments Kreitner Implemented Continuous Improvement Initiative Kaizen Effect Process
Process Improvement
Process Improvement (Barriers)
Issues impacting the process improvement
Staff disciplines cannot cross train
Staff could not be in “ready” status
Patient severity was not known in advance Shorter length of stay, immediate need to the discipline
Performance Improvement (Barriers) Variance in patient acuity leads to scheduling problems Service lines are not flexible for the short length of stay Medicare reimbursement is driven to the therapy target – loss of revenue
Staffing Barrier Specifics
COP for CMS Requirements for IRF Daily access to Physician 24 hour nursing Minimum 3 hours per day/5 days Two forms of therapy available
Reading Rehabilitation Hospital: Where are they now?
Acquired by HealthSouth Corp in 1998
One of multiple purchases in the 1990’s
Others included NovaCare, Columbia/HCA Mix of facilities, including acute care rehab
Not unlike RRH, faced challenges due to changing reimbursement landscape
Medicare Balance Budget Act Managed Care Organizations
Succeeded in maintaining, then increasing revenue projections
Diversification Capturing market share (simultaneously solving RRH volume problem)
Changes in Organization Model
Prior to sale, RRH returned to the “departmental” structure
Staffing efficiencies returned Issues relation to patient care addressed via better process coordination
As HealthSouth, RRH continues to use this model, now lead by a primary nurse “24-hour team of registered nurses and personal care assistants assess and attend to each patient's needs. They work in partnership under the primary nurse- model, which assures continuity of care. “
Although “time-limited” twice weekly conferences were piloted, weekly
interdisciplinary team meetings have been adopted under HealthSouth “Each week your treatment team will meet to discuss your progress, goals and discharge plan.’
Continued Growth and Success
The HealthSouth Reading Rehabilitation Hospital has expanded to offer
Inpatient Rehabilitation Outpatient Rehabilitation Home Heath Care Service
Continues to demonstrate high levels of patient satisfaction, as evidenced by higher than average ratings in two important measures:
“Would You Recommend” “Overall Quality of Care.”
Utilizes an “Outcomes Measurement” tool to track each patient’s functioning
Uses such data to benchmark outcomes and ensure programs are meeting patient rehabilitation needs
both upon admission and after treatment
Reading Rehab Group:
Jimmie Olazaba Stacey Benson Anemone Basabakwinshi Tahira Raza Ailiya Raza Quynh Smith Charles Workman Kenith Causey Grace Cruz
